34. I could see peace instead of this.

the core of the idea is that of piece of mind, i can have peace of mind. in other words, instead of giving people a ‘piece of my mind’ i can find ‘peace of my mind’.

that is a difficult concept, and a further difficult reality to achieve. so allow me to share part of my experience.

i was raised up in a christian church, those early teachings were a significant part of my life, and i did not confront how i was taught to “see” until i was in my early thirties, then i had to figure out why what i was “seeing” through my religious eyes did not harmonize with what i was “seeing” in the bible, which created in me non-peace. i had been at peace, but then found myself not at peace, and had to find out what was wrong. here’s some of what i mean.

for me, i was taught a very specific hermeneutic for interpreting the scriptures. i have written about this in other places, but for sake of compartmentalizing the information for this lesson, i will share some information about that hermeneutic.

I abbreviate using CENI, but the hermeneutic involves the following: Command, Example, Necessary Inference; conjoined equally with the Silence of the New Testament; and the Old Testament having no authority in the church or christian’s life; conjoined with Expediency.

initially, if there is a Command that the disciple of Jesus should do, then the disciple is to do it.

initially, if there is a Example that the disciple of Jesus should do, then the disciple is to do it.

initially, Necessary Inference means that no inference should be taken from the text other than what the text necessitates.

initially, Silence of the New Testament means that if the New Testament was silent about a topic, then that topic was prohibited.

initially, the Old Testament having no authority in the church or christian’s life means that the Old Testament was for the Patriarchs and Israel and had been done away with Christ’s death.

initially, Expediency means that which makes for practical application for carrying out any specific Command, Example, or Necessary Inference derived in part from Silence of the New Testament and derived in part from Old Testament having no authority.

initially, all of that I could “see”.

however, practically, the hermeneutic itself provided inconsistent interpretation and application, where christian argued with christian and congregations would argue with congregations to the point of intense debate and division, where each could find justification for their interpretation but one side would disfellowship the other, and refused reconciliation until the disfellowshipped gave in to the one who did the disfellowshipping.

it was a tremendous eye opening event to begin to “see” the practical result of how i was taught to “see” the scriptures. but i didn’t “see” the problem of the hermeneutic until i was in a home bible study that kept confronting what i was taught to “see” against what the text was leading me to “see”.

that was when i began to “see” that the hermeneutic could permit someone to relegate a Command or an Example to the history books, or at other times the hermeneutic would permit Expediency to mitigate or negate the Command.

that was when i began to “see” that the hermeneutic could Expedientially use the Old Testament to re-inforce prohibited actions, but Expediency would not use Old Testament to re-inforce permitted actions.

so the hermeneutic created practical problems, i could “see” that and it occurred to me that what I could “see” was the result of that hermeneutic, which meant that the hermeneutic did not bring me ‘peace of mind’ instead my mind which had once had peace was now awash in turmoil.

so i set my self on a course to “see” the text of the scriptures and bring peace to my mind.

i walked away from that multi-year course, having a much better ability to “see” the scriptures, but “seeing” the scriptures does not involve “seeing” through my old hermeneutic.

for me, “seeing” the bible required me to learn a whole new tool kit: having awareness to linear history, theological revelation, biblical events, biblical narrative, and specifically literature, and learning to “see” literature and what is and is not being conveyed in literature.

but consider that even if i thought that the CENI hermeneutic was proper, i could look at a passage like Romans 15.4 KJV “for whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning that we through the patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope” which provides, not a command, but an example of where a disciple can turn to receive some learning, learning insinuates teachings.

also consider that even if i thought that the CENI hermeneutic was proper, i could look at a passage like 1 Corinthians 10.1-14, and “see” in 1 Corinthians 10.6 that the apostle wrote an instruction, which is a type of command, to use the Old Testament examples, while the passage seems to be explicitly stating to learn from the ‘bad’ examples, the Necessary Inference is that to abstain from the bad examples one must learn from the good examples, both of which are found in the exact same place as, the scriptures written aforetime, in other words, the Old Testament.

so in any event, hermeneutics are a challenging concept. why? because hermeneutics are constructs of the mind, and the mind will either be at peace or the mind will not be at peace, and some will be at peace with the CENI hermeneutic even with all its inconsistencies, debates, and divisions.

but i wasn’t and couldn’t. why? i was trained up in computer programming; i was trained that logic had to have logical steps and logical conclusions otherwise logic fails, and the CENI is a logic based hermeneutic. therefore, from my training in logic, i could see logically that the CENI hermeneutic was not as logical as it presented itself which led to inconsistent conclusions about the scriptures, which did not bring me ‘peace of mind’.

so i learned that the hermeneutic was not the best, but i have not found any hermeneutic to be the best, because all hermeneutics seems to have inconsistent conclusions, and that is because hermeneutics are derived in the minds of humanity, which is a reason why i no longer argue hermeneutics.

for me, personally, i have found a method of study that provides increasingly consistent logical results, which allows my mind’s need to be a peace with the scriptures and be a peace with the world which has such diverse interpretations of the scriptures, which leads to the point of this lesson: i could see peace instead of this ‘confusion’ of hermeneutics.

some will choose ‘peace of mind’ by choosing to live with inconsistencies.

i could not live with those inconsistencies, so for me to have ‘peace of mind’ i chose to “see” differently, and in “seeing” differently i eventually arrived at ‘peace of mind’.

so the entire issue is that in order to “see” peace, one has to want to “see” another way.

but, i add for one to “see” another way, one has to actually “see” that there are problems in one’s current way of “seeing” because if/when one does not “see” a problem with their way of “seeing” things, then they will not be open to another way of “seeing”.

but for those who “see” problems and want to “see” another way, ‘peace of mind’ begins at home, inside the person, internally in the mind’s eye.

consider the following:
i could see peace in the situation with the computer instead of what i now see.
i could see peace in the situation with the car instead of what i now see.
i could see peace in the situation with the building instead of what i now see.

i could see peace in the situation with music instead of what i now see.
i could see peace in the situation with ideas instead of what i now see.
i could see peace in the situation with words instead of what i now see.

i could see peace in the situation with politics instead of what i now see.
i could see peace in the situation with religion instead of what i now see.
i could see peace in the situation with money instead of what i now see.

i could see peace in the situation with sexuality instead of what i now see.
i could see peace in the situation with emotionality instead of what i now see.
i could see peace in the situation with family instead of what i now see.

i could see peace in the situation with my personality instead of what i now see.
i could see peace in the situation with my mentality instead of what i now see.
i could see peace in the situation with my physicality instead of what i now see.

i could see peace in the situation with personal relationships instead of what i now see.
i could see peace in the situation with marriage instead of what i now see.
i could see peace in the situation with personal problems instead of what i now see.

but to have peace of mind requires “seeing” things differently.

that is a tall order, because there are times that in “seeing” things differently you will “feel” isolated from others, but that too is a way of “seeing” the situation, and thus one’s “seeing” has to be adjusted even in that moment.

“seeing” another way is not easy.
“seeing” another way is a struggle.
“seeing” another way takes commitment.
“seeing” another way means “seeing” things for peace.
“seeing” another way means “seeing” that ‘peace of mind’ begins with me.

Publishing Archive

Terms of UseWebsite materials are provided free of charge and are intended for not-for-profit noncommercial use. Users may print, save to electronic media, freely re-distribute and use, in-full or in-part, any of my written material. I simply ask for website credit and author credit for any use.